Re: Pinning a buffer in TupleTableSlot is unnecessary

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pinning a buffer in TupleTableSlot is unnecessary
Date: 2016-11-14 18:12:28
Message-ID: 17598.1479147148@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On 2016-11-14 12:32:53 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Basically my concern is that this restriction isn't documented anywhere
>> and I'm not entirely certain it's been adhered to everywhere. I'd feel
>> much better about it if there were some way we could verify that.

> Would support for valgrind complaining about access to unpinned buffers
> suffice?

I don't think it directly addresses the issue, but certainly it'd help.
Do you think that's easily doable?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2016-11-14 18:17:29 Re: Pinning a buffer in TupleTableSlot is unnecessary
Previous Message Andres Freund 2016-11-14 17:56:28 Re: Pinning a buffer in TupleTableSlot is unnecessary